# How long would combat forces last in WW3?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-would-combat-forces-last-in-ww3/620037>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [April 26, 2012, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-would-combat-forces-last-in-ww3/620037 "2012-04-26T17:01:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\
**Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-would-combat-forces-last-in-ww3/620037/12 "2012-04-26T18:33:12Z")

</div>

> [@Sailboat](#):
>
> Note that individual tanks and planes won’t survive long in a full-scale conventional war, never mind nuclear. Tom Clancy has written that main battle tanks have an expected average lifespan of minutes once the balloon goes up, and the Soviets famously designed combat aircraft with the understanding that it would be wasteful to make them very durable since they wouldn’t last long in a shooting war anyway (and regularly replacing them with new production in peacetime keeps your production lines open and your workers trained and employed, so it’s win-win).

Raises a good question: compared to their el cheapo WW2 counterparts, today’s multimillion dollar combat aircraft take awhile to build and a lot of resources (and manpower) to do so. Could factories which operate on peacetime build rates ramp up production fast enough to account for combat losses in a full shooting war?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-would-combat-forces-last-in-ww3/620037)._